/v/ - HAPPY E3 EVERYONE

I cant, i've been saying it for years.

only played 3 and I have nothing but disgust for that game

whoever made the upkeep mechanic should be shot

the soundtrack and artstyle of wc2 are absolutely brilliant

WC3 is a different game altogether, just with shared lore. Wouldnt compare them gameplay wise but I agree with everything else. The soundtrack is magnificent, I listen to it from time to time by itself since the scores are so damn great. I also prefer WC2's artstyle but for a very subjective reason. I came to play 2 when I was a child and had the handbook right next to me, the sketches were fucking brutal and the simplistic ingame art was just the representation of those in my mind. Getting to 3 the sketches represented the ingame art and both looked goofy suddenly, never recovered from that. It was the first phase of escalation of the Blizzard art style I grew to hate with a passion.

You werent able to build walls in the original campagnes though, that came with the expansion I think. You could only set them in the map editor. Which we all abused the hell out at the time.

>>14930345

>Games end up being heroes vs heroes battle. Soldiers are just regular meatshields while the hero does all the job

It's really easy to tell when someone hasn't played the game when they're this obvious.

>Great OST

Warcraft 2's OST was cheesy as fuck and made the entire game sound like some sort of Saturday Moring Cartoon

>2 factions and both equally balanced

Oh, how fondly I remember Ogre Mages raping anyone and anything with their bloodlust spell.

>No heroes, which means you win the game with pure strategy

Assuming the shitty pathfinding or not being able to select more than nine units at a time doesn't screw with you. Also, who says that Hero units are not part of the strategy itself?

>Naval Battles are better because you fight for oil

Oil was the fifth wheel on the wagon and was roughly as necessary as a root canal treatment. Half the time, players would not even bother to take to the seas because landing operations or naval bombardments were far less efficient than land-based attacks unless you played on an island map.

>Birds eye perspective

Which Warcraft 3 didn't have?

>>14930470

Truth but "high level" multiplayer doesnt allow for any kind of micro at all. Its orc/soldier rush and thats it. You could counter that with high tier units easily only on paper, youd need scripts to actually deploy that against 50+ base units though.

>>14930424

Imagine having taste this shit

WC3's ost was utterly unmemorable, practically nonexistent

>>14930470

Poly is insane in wc2. I came to wc2 while having a poor computer and playing only wc3 in clubs.

I patiently waited for a dragon to turn back from being a sheep.

AND I KEPT WAITING

HE NEVER TURNED BACK

I haven't played Tides of Darkness in so long, but it was a blast as a kid.

>>14930504

Also Elven Archers > Troll Axethrowers

Axethrower unique upgrade is slow regen while Archer unique upgrade is sharpshooter.

Incidentally "low level" multiplayer is basically tower wars. You haven't really played WC2 until you've had aggressive towering wars.

>>14931162

Did you click it to death?

>>14930458

>Warcraft 2's OST was cheesy as fuck and made the entire game sound like some sort of Saturday Moring Cartoon

But it's the cheesiness of the first 2 games that makes them so endearing anon.

>>14931453

>sharpshooter

bonus damage, I mean.

>>14931478

That's the disco cheat song. Vid related.

>>14931453

>Axethrower unique upgrade is slow regen while Archer unique upgrade is sharpshooter.

Indeed. Although ranged units were quite map specific. Towers on the other hand werent with the only exception of gold scarcity maps and who plays those anyway. Only way to counter well placed towers were upgraded ballistas/catapults and those were an economic death sentence. God damnit those memories keep haunting me.

>>14930345

What naval battles? I don't remember boats in WCIII.

WC2:

shit balance, shit controls

WC3 is better than WC2 at everything, objectively.

>>14942202

TFT had boats.

>>14930345

Starcraft: Brood War is better than Warcraft 2

Prove me wrong

The joke is that the games are too different to properly compare, you fucking idiot.

>>14942488

>>14942483

>>14942366

>>14930452

>>14930424

Look at all these kids defending warcraft 3 like true blizzdrones

>>14942496

How hungry are you for (You)s?

>>14930378

>whoever made the upkeep mechanic should be shot

The upkeep mechanic was there to limit the number of units you would play with because the engine couldn't handle it. Yet more proof that 3D ruins everything.

>>14930345

I have very fond memories of both, but I played WC3 the most. Probably more than any other game in my life. Are there any recent similar games?

WC3 OST was amazing fuck off.

>>14942512

I wish WC4 next blizzcon?please

>>14942676

Why would you ever want that? Blizzard has not released anything good since LoD.

>>14942676

Why? You will get some Jaina interracial shit with orcs, Arthus now loves Jaina.

>>14930345

>- 2 factions and both equally balanced

That's because they are just copies with different sprites. That's shit design

>No heroes, which means you win the game with pure strategy

-t. Never played the expansion

>>14942446

Only a few units in the campaign. Who gives a fuck about the campaign?

>>14942703

It would just play like SC2. Only thing it is missing is heroes but for SC2 with heroes you have either W3 or W3 remake in SC2. These games are extremely similar. Basically only thing you would gain by W4 is few extra missions and a lot of lore and story rape by modern Blizzard writers.

I suggest you either install SC2 as it is free or go to play W3. If you want more campaigns go get some custom ones for W3 or SC2. Eventually go play SC2 co-op.

>>14942853

>It would just play like SC2

Warcraft and sc have a fundamental difference you kike.

>>14942676

WoW is getting an RTS gameplay mode, so you kind of get your wish.

>making people fight between two good games

Fuck off

>>14942924

Source?

>>14942503

And yet upkeep is a fantastic gameplay mechanic.

>>14942676

I hope they do make it.

It'll be a piece of shit, but I have this sick desire to see how they are going to rape everything.

>>14942895

He means it would play largely the same because Blizz wouldn't bother making a brand new engine for one game.

As in, the game would likely devolve into two blobs of death facing each other just like in SC2.

>>14930345

Warcraft 1 was the best one.

>>14943019

For its time, but the controls, anon!

>>14943011

Upkeep is an interesting mechanic, but I think it's overall negative. The idea of the player with the bigger army has a harder time maintaining it is interesting. It's an inherent catch up mechanic that does not directly influence combat, tech etc, and can be overcome with proper management. But as a means to limit army sizes, it sucks, because the fun thing about RTS games is having big armies.

>>14942980

http://nichegamer.com/2018/05/23/classic-warcraft-3-rts-gameplay-returns-in-world-of-warcraft-battle-for-azeroths-warfronts/

http://archive.is/xX0zK (archive)

>>14943026

Upkeep existed so no one could use a giant army to kill the fps.

>>14930424

>Heroes add an additional layer of strategy and threat to consider.

Not really. Heroes just completely change the way you go about playing. In WC3 I tend to rally every building right onto my hero, making for less micromanagement and so it just ends up being easier to play.